Special 30% discount

Transcription

1 Special 30% discount on hardback copies of The transformation of European football. Simply contact NBN International on +44 (0) , or your details to quoting the discount code OTH289. Offer expires 30/09/2012. The transformation of European football Towards the Europeanisation of the national game Edited by ARNE NIEMANN, BORJA GARCÍA AND WYN GRANT

2 he transformation of European football

3

4 he transformation of European football Towards the Europeanisation of the national game Edited by Arne Niemann, Borja García and Wyn Grant Manchester University Press Manchester and New York distributed in the United States exclusively by Palgrave Macmillan

5 Copyright Manchester University Press 2011 While copyright in the volume as a whole is vested in Manchester University Press, copyright in individual chapters belongs to their respective authors, and no chapter may be reproduced wholly or in part without the express permission in writing of both author and publisher. Published by Manchester University Press Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9NR, UK and Room 400, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010, USA Distributed in the United States exclusively by Palgrave Macmillan, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010, USA Distributed in Canada exclusively by UBC Press, University of British Columbia, 2029 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z2 British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data applied for ISBN hardback First published 2011 he publisher has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for any external or third-party internet websites referred to in this book, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate. Typeset in Adobe Garamond by Servis Filmsetting Ltd, Stockport, Cheshire Printed in Great Britain by MPG Books Group, UK

6 Contents List of illustrations List of tables Notes on the contributors Acknowledgments vii viii ix xiv 1 Introduction: the transformation of European football 1 Arne Niemann, Borja García and Wyn Grant Part I Context 2 Europe: the transformation of football 23 Richard Parrish 3 UEFA and the European Union: the green shoots of a new European public space? 40 Jonathan Hill Part II Country studies 4 Germany: between modest adjustment and system transformation 59 Alexander Brand and Arne Niemann 5 England: a liberal model under challenge? 80 Wyn Grant 6 France: a case of UEFAisation? 97 David Ranc and Albrecht Sonntag 7 Italy: the least of the great leagues? 115 Osvaldo Croci, Nicola Porro and Pippo Russo 8 Spain: parochialism or innovation? 134 Borja García, Alberto Palomar Olmeda and Carmen Pérez González 9 he Netherlands: the problematic future of Dutch football 152 Otto Holman, Rik de Ruiter and Rens Vliegenthart

7 vi Contents 10 he Europeanisation of Austrian football: historically determined and modern processes 171 Alexander Brand, Arne Niemann and Georg Spitaler 11 Sweden: the development of club football on the periphery of Europe 187 Torbjörn Andersson, Jyri Backman and Bo Carlsson 12 Poland: new shape, old problems 204 Magdalena Kędzior and Melchior Szczepanik 13 Switzerland: professionalisation and internationalisation, courtesy of the EU and UEFA 221 Dirk Lehmkuhl and Olivier Siegrist 14 Conclusion: a Europeanised game? 239 Borja García, Arne Niemann and Wyn Grant Index 263

8 List of illustrations 3.1 Number of diferent teams reaching the UEFA Champions League quarter- inals in the previous three years. Source UEFA Number of places occupied in the quarter- inals of the UEFA Champion Clubs Cup and Champions League by the eleven most successful teams between 1989 and Source UEFA he proportion of top players playing in England, Germany, Italy and Spain. Source Data from Fifa.com, the European Football Yearbooks and PlayerHistory.com, analysis by NERA Average number of spectators per match, Serie A, Source Centro Studi Lega Calcio, calcio.it/it/ Lega-Calcio/Bacheca/Regolamenti/Centro-Studi.page Percentage of expatriate players and average number of players under contract per club, Serie A, Source Compiled from the data bank of the Associazione Italiana Calciatori, Positions of traditional top three clubs on UEFA ranking. Source UEFA (2009) Revenues of Dutch clubs compared with Real Madrid and Manchester United. Source Deloitte (2007, 2008, 2009) Foreigners playing in major Dutch league (Eredivise). Source Elfvoetbal (2009) Transfers of Dutch players to English, Italian, Spanish and German leagues. Source Dutch Players Abroad (2009) Shares of foreign players by country of origin Average revenues of SFL Clubs, Source Swiss Football League magazine No. 2/2009:

9 List of tables 3.1 Average number of diferent teams inishing in the top ive positions over the previous ive years Deloitte 2009 survey of Europe s richest clubs Eleven teams to have reached most UEFA Champions League quarter-inals between 1989 and Phasing in of UEFA home- grown players rule Options available to clubs to respond to home- grown players rule in Development of German- born players, UEFA residents and non- UEFA residents before and after the Bosman ruling he systematisation of Europeanisation processes in German football across sub- cases Serie A net proits and losses, Nationality quotas in Spanish football, 1928 to the present Number of players ielded in the Spanish Primera División, Television revenue of the top Spanish clubs in the season Most expensive transfers of Dutch League players to foreign clubs and most expensive transfers of foreign players to Dutch clubs, January 2003 September Dutch national team players: present club, number of games played in national team and number of goals scored in national team, March Average attendance in Sweden, Denmark and Norway, 2002 and

10 Notes on the contributors Torbjörn Andersson holds a position as a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Sports Studies, Malmö University. His doctoral thesis resulted in King Football. he Cultural History of Swedish Football (in Swedish). He was editor (with Bo Carlsson) of a special issue on Scandinavian football of Soccer and Society (2009). He is writing a book on the history of Swedish football from 1950 to the present. Jyri Backman is a Ph.D. student in the Department of Sports Studies, Malmö University, Master of Laws and Bachelor of Education in physical education teaching, with the main focus on sport management and sport law. He has written books and articles on Swedish sport law. His research focus is on the organisation and structure of the ice hockey leagues in Sweden and in Finland in light of the European model of sport and the American major leagues. Alexander Brand is lecturer in International Politics University of Dresden where he wrote his Ph.D. thesis on the relationship of the mass media and international relations analysed through a constructivist lens (2009), forthcoming as a book. In addition his research focuses on global development politics and US foreign and world policy. Bo Carlsson, Department of Sports Studies, Malmö University, is Professor of Sports Studies as well as of Sociology of Law, with the main focus on the legal culture of sport, discretionary powers among referees, and the juridiication of football, for instance the regulation of the elite licences. He was editor (with Torbjörn Andersson) of a special issue on Scandinavian football of Soccer and Society (2009). In 2010 he edited a special issue of Sport in Society, Directions in Contemporary and Future Sport. Osvaldo Croci is Professor of International and European Politics in the Department of Political Science at the Memorial University of Newfoundland, St Johns. He has published numerous articles and chapters in edited books on Canadian and Italian foreign and security policy, US EU and Canada EU relations, as well as on sport and politics. Borja García is Lecturer in Sports Management and Policy at the School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University. He has researched extensively the origins and development of EU sports policy and

11 x Notes on the contributors its consequences for the governance of football. His research interests focus on the role of public authorities, especially EU institutions, in the governance and regulation of sport. He also has an interest in European integration theories and agenda setting as policy- making theory. He has published articles in journals such as the Journal of European Public Policy and the International Journal of Sport Policy. He is a founder member of the Association for the Study of Sport and the European Union. Wyn Grant is Professor of Politics at the University of Warwick but teaches in the Departments of Biological Sciences, Economics and Philosophy and Warwick Business School. He is Vice- president for Europe and Africa of the International Political Science Association. He has written extensively on the Common Agricultural Policy and EU environmental and food chain policy but has also published on the political economy of football. He is co- editor of the web site Jonathan Hill opened UEFA s EU oice in Brussels in Until the end of 2009 he co- ordinated UEFA s political relations with the EU institutions, and shaped the organisation s EU strategy. In February 2010 he joined the cabinet of Androulla Vassiliou, European Commissioner of Education and Culture. He has lived in Brussels since 1995, advising public and private- sector organisations on their relations with the European Union. He obtained a Master s in European studies from the College of Europe, Natolin ( ), a Master s in European geopolitics from the University of Paris, Marne- la- Vallée ( ) and a B.A. in French and German from the University of Bradford ( ). Otto Holman is Reader in International Relations and European Integration Studies in the Department of Political Science, University of Amsterdam, and member of the Amsterdam School of Social Science Research. His research interests include the role of transnational social forces in emerging patterns of European governance, peripheral capitalism and EU enlargement, and the regional impact of core periphery relations in Europe. He is working on transformation processes in Central Europe and the European Union, and on the new patterns of core periphery relations in an enlarged Union. Magdalena Kędzior is Lecturer in the School of Law and Public Administration in Przemysl- Rzeszow, Poland. Her Ph.D. thesis (Hamburg, 2005) on the judicial system in sport was a comparative study of the Polish and German legal systems. She teaches on European institutional law as well as on European regional and social policy. Within sports law her research interests focus mainly on the area of anti- doping law. She has published inter alia on the efects of EU anti- doping law and policy on international and domestic sports law in member states in the International Sports Law Journal (2007). Dirk Lehmkuhl is Professor of European Politics at the University of St Gallen. He was formerly at the Universities of Constance and Bielefeld in Germany, the European University in Florence, the Max Planck Institute for

12 Notes on the contributors xi the Research of Collective Goods in Bonn and the University of Zurich. His teaching and research portfolio include themes of European integration and international relations, including European public policies, comparative regional integration, the contribution of non- state actors to global governance and the legalisation of transnational relations. He is academic director of the B.A. and M.A. programmes International Afairs and Governance at the University of St Gallen. Arne Niemann is Professor of International Politics at the Univesity of Mainz. He previously taught at the universities of Amsterdam, Dresden and Cambridge. He is author of Explaining Decisions in the European Union (2006) and has published in several journals, including the Journal of European Public Policy (1998, 2004, 2010, 2011 forthcoming) and the Journal of Common Market Studies (2008). His research focuses primarily on the European integration process and EU politics and policy. Recurrent themes and aspects of his research include neofunctionalist and constructivist approaches to theorising European integration, EU external relations, EU migration policy and the Europeanisation of sport Alberto Palomar is Associate Professor in Administrative Law at Carlos III University, Madrid. His research interests focus on the analysis of Spanish anti- doping law and policy and company sport law. He has taught and published extensively in these areas. He is also a member of the Spanish Olympic Committee. Richard Parrish is Professor and Director of the Centre for Sports Law Research at Edge Hill University, Ormskirk. His research explores the interface between sport and EU law, focusing particularly on the impact of European integration on players rights, sports broadcasting and the governance of sport. He is author of two monographs and two edited collections and he has co- authored sports law reports for the European Commission and the European Parliament. He has delivered over ifty academic papers on his research in over twenty countries. He is Honorary Chair of the Association for the Study of Sport and the European Union. Carmen Pérez is Lecturer in Public International Law at Carlos III University, Madrid. She has researched European sport policy and international and European anti- doping law and policy. She has published several works on these topics and lectures in special courses, seminars and LL.M. courses on European sport policy. Since 2004 she has served as a member of the Spanish Discipline Committee for Sport. Nicola Porro is Professor at the University of Cassino, Italy, where he leads the Lab on the Cultures of Sport and Health. He has been a member of the extended board of the International Sociological Association s research committee on the sociology of sport and secretary of the research committee on body and social sciences. He has participated in many international programmes of research. On behalf of Italian National Television he led two research projects on

13 xii Notes on the contributors the consumption of sport by the media system. He developed various ield analyses on the role of sport in the public imagery. He is author of numerous books on sport as a social phenomenon. From 1998 to 2005 he was national president of the Unione Italiana Sport per Tutti and member of the Italian National Council on the Economy and Employment. David Ranc holds a Ph.D. in European Studies from the University of Cambridge. A French- born political scientist working from a comparative perspective, he has published extensively on football supporters and European regulations, including the impact of the Bosman ruling, and the Commission White Paper on sport. His book Foreign Players and Football Supporters. he Old Firm, Arsenal, Paris Saint- Germain is due to be published by Manchester University Press in Rik de Ruiter is a postdoctoral researcher in the department of Political Science and Research Methods, University of Twente, Netherlands. His main research interests are European integration, comparative politics and new modes of governance in international organisations. His latest publications are on the Open Method of Co- ordination in the EU context, its development in the education and research and development domains, and the involvement of the British and Dutch legislatures in Open Methods. Pippo Russo teaches sociology in the University of Florence and the University Roma IV. His main research interests are sport, citizenship, and body cultures. He also works as journalist for several Italian daily newspapers and magazines. He has written three novels. Olivier Siegrist holds a Master s degree in European political and administrative studies and has worked as an academic assistant at the Institute of Political Science, University of St Gallen. His main research interests include Swiss EU relations in every aspect and environmental and transport issues. Albrecht Sonntag is chair of the Centre for European Integration at the Ecole Supérieure des Sciences Commerciales d Angers. A German- born sociologist, he has published extensively on European football over the past years (including a regular column on the French game in the critical football quarterly Der tödliche Pass). His book Les Identités du football européen (2008) received the annual UCPF award for the best academic book on football in the French language. Georg Spitaler is a member of the staf of the Department of Political Science at the University of Vienna. His research interests include sport and populism, sport and migration and football history. With Wolfram Manzenreiter he coedited a special issue of Soccer and Society, Governance, Citizenship and the New European Football Championships. he European Spectacle (2010). Melchior Szczepanik holds a Ph.D. from Loughborough University. His doctoral dissertation was devoted to the socialisation of Polish members of the European Parliament. He has conducted research on the consequences of Polish membership of the EU. He is employed by the Chancellery of the Senate of the

14 Notes on the contributors xiii Republic of Poland. he views expressed in Chapter 12 are his private opinions and do not represent the position of his employer. Rens Vliegenthart is an Associate Professor in political communication in the Department of Communication Science and the Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam, as well a member of the board of the Centre of Politics and Communication. His research deals with the interaction of politics, the media and public opinion, election campaigns and social movements.

15 Acknowledgments he origins of this volume go back to debates on several conference panels, more seriously beginning with the irst Sport & EU conference in Loughborough in 2006, followed by a panel at the European Union Studies Association conference in Montreal (2007). Perhaps the experience of drawing quite big audiences at international conventions (while being cramped into the smallest conference rooms) provided extra motivation for a joint publication at the nexus of European politics, economics and law, on the one hand, and football on the other. After Montreal more concrete exchanges took place between the three of us concerning the idea of a volume on the transformation of European football with Europeanisation as a central theme. After successfully enlisting specialist authors both upcoming and more established researchers for the various chapters, we met for an intensive workshop in Amsterdam in June 2009 to discuss the authors drafts. he workshop not only helped to ine- tune the direction of the volume and yield input for the authors but also enabled those who had not already met to be socialised into the group. We would like to thank Dave Allen, who acted as a discussant at EUSA in Montreal and who presented stimulating and thoughtful concluding relections at the workshop in Amsterdam. We are also grateful to the other discussants and participants at the events in Loughborough, Montreal and Amsterdam for their encouragement and helpful comments. In addition we would like to express our gratitude to several institutions for inancing the workshop in Amsterdam: the Centre for the Study of International Governance at the University of Loughborough, the Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research (also for logistical support), the Institute of Sport and Leisure Policy at the University of Loughborough, and the University Association for Contemporary European Studies. Finally, we would like to thank Anthony Mason of Manchester University Press for his valuable advice. A.N. B.G. W.G.

16 1 Introduction: the transformation of European football Arne Niemann, Borja García and Wyn Grant Although football better known as soccer in some parts of the world is still in its infancy as a subject of study in the social sciences, there is a growing body of literature which tries to describe and explain important political, economic and social dimensions of the game. his tendency is more evident within the globalisation debates, where football is taken to be one of the most globalised phenomena (e.g. Foer 2004; Giulianotti and Robertson 2007). Other authors have also tried to establish a link between European integration and the development of football in the continent (e.g. Missiroli 2002), whilst the study of the impact of European Union (EU) law and policies on football has also attracted considerable academic attention (e.g. Holt 2007; Parrish 2003; Parrish and Miettinen 2008; García 2007, 2009). However, most authors have concentrated on the European level of football governance, with fewer attempts made to link the supranational policies of the EU with organisational transformations of football at national level (see for example King 2003 as one of the possible exceptions, although he does not focus on EU politics and policies as a main force behind the game s evolution; see also Brand and Niemann 2007). In this book we analyse the evolution of national football structures in ten diferent European countries. For that purpose we have chosen to rely on an analytical framework based on the concept of Europeanisation. It is recognised from the outset that the transformation of football in Europe is due to a combination of diferent factors (local, national, international), and that is evident in the contributions to this volume. he chapters ahead explain change through diferent mechanisms and dynamics in order to evaluate the degree of importance of EU decisions within those dynamics. However, the contributions in this volume ind their common ground in the concept of Europeanisation, which is broadly deined as the impact of European governance on the domestic arena. By focusing on the impact of European integration on the domestic level the book relects the evolution of the EU integration studies research agenda: after four decades of attention on developments of integration at the European level,

17 2 Arne Niemann, Borja García and Wyn Grant in the mid- 1990s scholars have increasingly begun to examine the efect that EU politics and policies may have at the domestic level. Even though research on Europeanisation has turned into something like an academic growth industry in recent years, it merits continued systematic academic attention, for several reasons. he Europeanisation research agenda arguably focuses on a set of very important research questions, related to where, how, why and to what extent domestic change occurs as a consequence of European integration/governance. Second, judged against ive decades that European integration studies have focused on explaining and describing the emergence and development of a supranational system of European cooperation, research on Europeanisation is still at comparatively early stages. hird, it is diicult to make irm (cause- andefect) generalisations in this ield of inquiry, given, for example, the considerable variation in national institutional histories, actor constellations and structural diferentiation and the wide scope of EU policies (cf. Olsen 2002: 933 f.). his volume concentrates on professional football, the sport that is subject to most (well known) European level cases and decisions. In the last ten to ifteen years the development of sport as an industry has reached peak levels: [a] study presented in 2006 suggests that sport in a broad sense generated value added of 407 billion in 2004 [throughout the European Union], accounting for 3.7 per cent of EU GDP, and employment for 15 million people or 5.4 per cent of the labour force (European Commission 2007a: 11). he social importance of football and other sports in Europe should not be underestimated either. Sport plays a signiicant role in health promotion, education, training and social inclusion and networking (European Commission 2007b: 7). Unfortunately, there are no disaggregated data to single out the contribution of football to this economic and social development, but it seems safe to assume that football is the most popular team sport throughout Europe. It is perhaps not far from the truth, either, to assert that football is one of the main factors in the economic and commercial development of professional sport as an industry. Moreover, the economic importance of professional football spills over to other markets, especially the audio- visual industry (e.g. Kruse and Quitzau 2003). Possessing rights to live games in leagues is a vital determinant of the success or otherwise of television companies, particularly those using cable, satellite or pay- per- view formats. Football s inluence cuts across political, economic social and cultural spheres, and should also be illustrative of other sectors of European sport. In this introductory chapter we set the conceptual foundations that will inform the book s analysis throughout. First, we concentrate on specifying the concept of Europeanisation. Part II systematises alternative explanatory factors that can account for the transformation of European football. hirdly, we briely justify the selection of case studies. Finally, we give an outline of the book s structure.

18 Introduction 3 The concept of Europeanisation Research on Europeanisation has gradually increased since the mid- 1990s and has developed into an academic growth industry over the irst decade of the century. 1 While the term Europeanisation has been taken up by most (sub- )disciplines in the humanities and social sciences focusing on Europe, it is arguably in the area of political science scholarship dealing with European integration that the concept has been used most widely. In this latter ield alone, the term Europeanisation is used in a number of diferent ways to describe a variety of phenomena and processes of change (cf. Olsen 2002). Most frequently Europeanisation is referred to as the impact of European/EU governance on domestic change, in terms of policy substance and instruments, processes of interest representation and policy style, as well as (political) structures and institutions (e.g. Radaelli 2000: 3; Ladrech 1994: 69). Existing policies (in integrated sectors) are increasingly made at the European level, which leads to substantial changes in the policy fabric (and content) of EU member states (e.g. Caporaso and Jupille 2001). At the level of politics, European governance impacts on domestic processes of political and societal interest representation and aggregation as well as on the policy style (e.g. Hartcourt and Radaelli 1999). In terms of polity, Europeanisation focuses on the efect of EU integration and European- level governance on domestic (mainly political) structures and institutions (e.g. Börzel 2001). Top- down and bottom- up Europeanisation As a starting point, Europeanisation is understood here as the process of change in the domestic arena resulting from the European level of governance. However, Europeanisation is viewed not as a unidirectional but as a two- way process which develops both top down and bottom up. Top- down perspectives largely emphasise vertical developments from the European to the domestic level, which has also been referred to as downloading (Ladrech 1994; Schmidt 2002). Bottom- up (or uploading ) accounts stress the national inluence concerning European- level developments (which in turn feeds back into the domestic realm). his perspective highlights that member states are more than passive receivers of European- level pressures. hey may shape policies and institutions on the European level to which they have to adjust at a later stage (Börzel 2002). By referring to Europeanisation as a two- way process our conceptualisation underlines the interdependence of the European and domestic levels for an explanation of Europeanisation (processes). In contrast to a unidirectional top- down use of the concept, studying Europeanisation as a two- way process entails certain disadvantages in terms of (waning) conceptual parsimony and methodological straightforwardness. However, we argue that these problems are outweighed by a substantially greater ability to capture important empirical phenomena. It has convincingly been shown, for example, that member states responses to Europeanisation processes

19 4 Arne Niemann, Borja García and Wyn Grant feed back into the European level of decision making. hus European/EU policies, institutions and processes cannot be taken as given, but are, at least to some extent, the result of domestic political preferences and processes which are acted out at the European level (Börzel 2002, 2003; Dyson 2000). However, as will be further speciied later on, framing Europeanisation processes as the interplay of the European realm and the domestic realm still constitutes a considerable simpliication. For example, transnational (non- EU)- level developments may provide important properties of Europeanisation (cf. next sub- section). In addition, related to the previous point, it should be pointed out that for us Europeanisation does not equate with EUisation. Rather the EU is only part (albeit an important one) of the wider fabric of cross- border regimes in Europe in which other transnational institutions and frameworks, both formal and informal, also play a role. Hence the EU is not the monopoly source and channel of Europeanisation (cf. Wallace 2000: esp. 371, 376). his may include institutional arrangements at the European level which are related to European integration and co- operation in a broader sense, such as the Council of Europe (COE) or the Organisation for Security and Co- operation in Europe (OSCE) at the political level but also organisations such as the Association Européenne des Conservatoires (AEC) and more important in this context the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA), at the societal level. 2 While working with a fairly wide notion of Europeanisation, it is important to delimit the concept clearly in order to avoid the danger of overstretching it. For example, we would reject the emergence and development at the European level of distinct structures of governance as an appropriate deinition of Europeanisation (Risse et al. 2001: 3, authors emphasis). Closely related, Europeanisation as conceived of here is to be distinguished from political uniication of Europe (Olsen 2002: 940). Although above we have pointed out that our conceptualisation relates to interaction with the European integration process and to changes at the European/EU level, the core focus remains on the process of change in the domestic arena. 3 In addition, Europeanisation should not be confused with harmonisation and also difers from convergence. Europeanisation may lead to harmonisation and convergence, but such is not necessarily the case. Empirical indings indicate that Europeanisation may have a diferential impact on national policy making and that it leaves considerable margin for domestic diversities (cf. Héritier et al. 2001; Caporaso and Jupille 2001). Moreover, as pointed out by Radaelli (2000: 5) there is a diference between a process (Europeanisation) and its consequences (e.g. potentially harmonisation and convergence). The societal/transnational dimension of Europeanisation Apart from top- down (downloading) and bottom- up (uploading) accounts of Europeanisation, we would like to highlight an aspect that has been neglected in the literature that is relevant for some of the empirical analysis of the chapters

20 Introduction 5 to follow: the societal/transnational dimension of Europeanisation (which could also be seen as a form of cross- loading 4 ). his dimension encapsulates two elements: (1) the level and sphere of change; (2) the type of agency generating or resisting change. Hence by the societal dimension we mean, on the one hand, the fact that regulation and jurisdiction from Brussels are likely to induce some adaptational pressure not only at the political level but also in societal contexts, e.g. the realm of sport and, for our purpose, football. On the other hand, to speak of a transnational dimension of Europeanisation aims at capturing some trends, which can be traced in analysing how societal actors are either reacting to attempts at regulation by the EU or creating transnational spaces that in turn impact on the governance of football. Highlighting the societal/transnational dimension contributed to our rather broad conceptualisation of Europeanisation. Concept stretching has to be justiied, given the potential loss of analytical clarity (cf. Radaelli 2000). We argue that accounting for the societal and transnational dimension is justiied, as otherwise interesting ields of study and important dynamics between the European and the domestic levels would go largely unnoticed. As has been noted, the societal dimension of Europeanisation mainly indicates the sphere of change. In contrast to most studies, we chose to study a subject (football) which is seemingly non- political. What makes such a case interesting is that it represents a social context, which forms an important and conscious part of citizens life world. It is therefore a context, which is realised by many people as part of their lives not a supposedly abstract and inaccessible sphere of politics. To study processes of Europeanisation at this societal level thereby should allow a deeper understanding of any Europeanisation regarding citizens life worlds. Although this is not a major theme in this volume, the question of a Europeanisation of life worlds could lead to interesting insights in the eventual formation of a common European identity, a subject much debated in the current literature (cf. Risse 2004: ; Mayer and Palmowski 2004). Aside from these considerations, to study Europeanisation dynamics within a societal ield such as football seems to be highly interesting because of two reasons. First, it allows us to explore the general applicability of Europeanisation concepts (sources, dynamics and level of change) which have been derived mainly from the analysis of more political contexts. he question is then: to what extent do these concepts explain dynamics in these rather more societal contexts? Second, our study may clarify potential blind spots, i.e. dynamics and interrelated mechanisms in Europeanisation processes that have been largely ignored by traditional analyses, which have mainly dealt with political issues. Although it would be wrong to assert that transnational dimensions of Europeanisation have only rarely been mentioned, the concept of transnationalism itself is less frequently speciied and illustrated empirically in Europeanisation studies. 5 hus mostly the transnational quality of relationships is merely stated

21 6 Arne Niemann, Borja García and Wyn Grant or an ongoing transnationalisation within EU/Europe is simply assumed (e.g. Menz 2003; Winn 2003; Feron 2004). On the other hand, it is questionable whether the debate on concepts of transnationalism and transnational actors in the discipline of international relations ofers many sensible starting points here, 6 mainly because this debate is still primarily concerned with proving against a state- centered picture of world politics that [transnational actors] matter (Risse 2002: 268). In the context of (European) integration studies, scholars working in the transactionist, neofunctionalist or supranational governance perspective have of course somewhat gone beyond that and developed accounts of transnational dynamics (Deutsch 1953; Deutsch et al. 1957; Haas 1958; Lindberg 1963; Stone Sweet et al. 1997; Niemann 2006). However, their focus was above all on the development of co- operation, institutions and policies at the supranational level, i.e. on (European) integration, rather than Europeanisation, with its primary focus on change in the domestic arena. While not diverging from a common deinition of transnationalism, our concept also encompasses actors that have been less analysed in the current literature, which heavily focuses on either non- proit NGOs or proit- driven multinational corporations. We deine transnational actors as societal actors in a broad sense, who co- ordinate their actions with societal actors from other national contexts in Europe, thereby creating common, transnational reactions to EU institutions and/or creating transnational institutions. Transnationalism within Europe here therefore rests on transboundary networks of actors, whose interests and perceptions are either aggregated or amalgamated within these networks and institutions. Transnational governance networks across countries have undoubtedly preceded the Europeanisation processes described in this book. hat is, there are transnational sports bodies such as UEFA (founded in 1954) and its global counterpart, the International Football Federation (FIFA, founded in 1909) formed of delegates from national associations. However, as this volume will indicate, transnational Europeanisation processes since the 1990s have induced a new quality of transnational agency. To speak of a societal/transnational dimension of Europeanisation in the end means to pay tribute to the interrelatedness of the sphere of change and the type of agency: football as a societal sphere is characterised by a growing transnationalisation, as will be shown. Opening up the ield of Europeanisation studies to this dimension further adds to the awareness of the impressive complexity of Europeanisation processes, but it may also incorporate the consciously perceived Europeanised life worlds of European citizens into the academic debate (on this point cf. especially Chapter 3 on UEFA and Chapter 4 on Germany). The Europeanisation process: some systemising factors A number of scholars have introduced diferent typologies in order to systematise Europeanisation processes. his section will formulate several

22 Introduction 7 systematisations, which are to some extent derived from the existing literature. he suggested sub- categories are meant to capture only some important aspects and are of course by no means exhaustive. Subsequently, these factors will broadly inform the empirical analysis in the country chapters. However, they are not meant to be restrictive for the authors analysis in the book, because our intention is to ascertain the potential of Europeanisation as an explanatory (independent) variable of the transformation of football (dependent variable). hus it is also necessary to be aware of other factors that may help to explain football s transformation. To begin with, the basic sources of Europeanisation top- down, bottom- up and transnational/societal have already been suiciently pointed out above and thus require no further explication here. Although these sources of Europeanisation often substantially interact, certain tendencies in terms of these dimensions can usually be ascertained (cf. Lodge 2002). Secondly, we can diferentiate in terms of the level of strength of Europeanisation sources and pressures. As for top- town processes, a number of indicators can be suggested. he legal bindingness of EU provisions probably constitutes the best indicator for the force of top- down pressures (Vink 2002: 9 10). Having said that, Europeanisation is not conined to legally binding EU provisions. It may be carried by more cognitive or ideational mechanisms. Although termed the weakest Europeanisation trigger (Knill 2001: 221), the framing of domestic beliefs and expectations still seems to drive Europeanisation processes forward to some extent (Knill and Lehmkuhl 2002: 258). 7 In addition, the degree of clarity, both in terms of legal argumentation (e.g. concerning ECJ rulings) and in terms of legal competence (e.g. regarding exclusive or shared competence in the case of Commission involvement) inluences the weight of downward adaptational pressures. Ambiguity in these respects adversely afects Europeanisation dynamics. Moreover, the level of uniformity of reaching a decision at the European level e.g. in the Council or between the Council and the European Parliament on legislative acts, or in the European Commission concerning decisions in the area of competition policy also impacts on the strength of top- down Europeanisation sources and pressures. It can be assumed that, generally speaking, more uniform and consensual decisions at European level may have a more signiicant Europeanisation efect than rather contested EU decisions. As for bottom- up or transnational/societal Europeanisation, indicators regarding the strength of processes seem less obvious and perhaps more limited at this stage of inquiry. However, for example the existence of alternative (policy) venues or of credible exit options from prevailing arrangements and, more generally, the possibility of challenging existing regimes (e.g. when undesired policy externalities arise) condition the strength of such Europeanisation dynamics (cf. Lodge 2002).

23 8 Arne Niemann, Borja García and Wyn Grant Our third categorisation concerns reactions to initial top- down Europeanisation pressures. Broadly speaking, one can distinguish between reactions on two levels: the level of policy formulation and the level of implementation (cf. Bugdahn 2005: 183). he type of reaction in terms of formulation and implementation depends on several factors, such as prevailing norms and preferences on the part of those afected or addressed by the initial Europeanisation pressures and partly overlapping with actors preferences the goodness of it, i.e. the compatibility between the (e.g. domestic) status quo and newly induced (e.g. EU) requirements. 8 On the level of (policy) formulation, we suggest that reactions to primary Europeanisation can take on diferent forms: (1) support, when afected/addressed actors back new requirements; (2) acquiescence, when agents simply accept the changes stemming from Europeanisation; (3) engagement/intervention, when actors seek to modify or reduce adaptational pressures; (4) confrontation, when actors try to resist or escape initial Europeanisation pressures. he degree of misit can be assumed to gradually increase on this continuum. Adjustment costs are also sought to be minimised at the level of implementation, where losses made in the formulation stage may, to some extent, be compensated. In the EU context, member states often retain considerable discretion in interpreting EU rules (e.g. Mörth 2003). Implementation of EU provisions can range from what an objective observer would consider full and comprehensive, or even progressive to more conservative interpretations of requirements. In addition, member states tend to have the option of adopting new or preserving old national legislation that inluences the operational context of the transposing legislation (Bugdahn 2005: 179). Our fourth element systematising the Europeanisation processes is the strength of reaction to initial Europeanisation pressures. he impact of such responses will depend on several factors, one of which is access to government/ policy makers and the strategic position in or membership of policy/advocacy networks. Another factor is organisational strength, made up, for example, of material resources, the degree of centralisation and cohesiveness, efective management, etc. (cf. Menz 2003). Finally, the degree of change of national settings as result of Europeanising forces can be categorised. Drawing on Lodge (2002) and Radaelli (2004), who themselves drew on earlier writings, three main forms concerning the impact of Europeanisation pressures are suggested here: (1) system maintenance, which is characterised by a lack of change or the rejection of new requirements; (2) adjustment, where existing policy cores are not challenged, but some nonfundamental changes are absorbed and new layers may be added to the regime; (3) transformation, which denotes paradigmatic or core policy changes. Chapters 4 13 will be guided by these categories that make up Europeanisation processes, i.e. sources, strength of initial pressures, reaction, strength of reaction and degree of change.

24 Introduction 9 Other transformational forces Europeanisation is the principal organising paradigm structuring this book, but other transformational forces are certainly at work in the recent evolution of European professional football. he most signiicant of these is the efect of economic market forces, which take the form of commercialisation and globalisation. here is a substantial literature on the relationship between European integration and globalisation (Rosamond 2005), but one theme that emerges from it is the Janus- faced relationship of the EU to globalisation. On the one hand, the central project of the EU, the single market, creates new opportunities for transnational companies to secure economies of scale and acts as an incentive to cross- border mergers. On the other hand, the EU seeks to protect its citizens, particularly those who are economically marginal or socially excluded, from the worst efects of globalisation, through various forms of European social policy. he EU both encourages and fends of multinational capital from other parts of the world which are perceived to be potentially economically stronger, particularly the United States and East and South Asia. he situation of football is rather diferent from that in other economic sectors because Europe, at least in terms of economic power, is the centre of the international game. It has the global brands such as Manchester United, Chelsea, Bayern Munich, AC Milan or Real Madrid and it imports talent from around the world. For some analysts, the position of European football in the global system is essentially exploitative. his is the view taken by Hobsbawm (2007), who sees the leading European clubs are engaged in a system of capitalist imperialism in which Africa and Latin America are deprived of talent as it is imported into Europe to the detriment of the formerly proud clubs of Brazil and Argentina (Hobsbawm 2007: 91). Hobsbawm sees tensions arising between these globalising forces and national identity. International business, in his view, tends to favour competitions involving the super- clubs, and this produces a clash with the national teams that carry the full political and emotional load of national identity (Hobsbawm 2007: 92). Such tensions are evident between leading clubs and national governing bodies over whether players should be released for national team duty in friendly games or how clubs should be compensated when the player is returned injured. However, one must be cautious about reading of a narrative about the dominance of globalising forces, albeit European ones, from a reductionist account of the complex structural tensions in the game. It is clear that sport remains a focus of national identity and that diferent countries organise their national game in diferent ways. he population of the country is clearly a factor here, so that a wealthy country with a small population like Luxembourg has little option but to organise its comprehensive national league system around largely amateur players. Larger and more prosperous countries such as Sweden have made an

25 10 Arne Niemann, Borja García and Wyn Grant efort to preserve amateurism in sport, or at least to ensure that it ofers opportunities for maximum participation. he challenge for countries like Sweden is that talent goes where the money is, and the Champions League becomes increasingly dominated by teams from the larger countries. In accounts of most economic sectors, technology would be an important transformational factor. he technology of the game itself has changed very little: the most important change was probably efective loodlighting to permit evening matches. Artiicial pitches have had limited success, and some technology such as that which can assess whether a goal has been scored has so far been stoutly resisted by the game s authorities. he technological transformation has been in the televising of the game. Colour television was transformative, and then near- earth satellites facilitated charging viewers for receiving games. hey also made possible the simultaneous global screening of games, facilitating betting on games, which is a major driver of its popularity in parts of East Asia. High- deinition television and perhaps even 3- D will enhance the viewing experience and increase the number of supporters who never attend a live game. In relation to television and the audio- visual market, the emergence of new private television outlets also counts as an important source of transformation. he interest of satellite and pay- per- view operators in acquiring broadcasting rights to live football competitions generated tensions between the traditional organisers of competitions (be that UEFA at European level, professional leagues or federations at national level) and the clubs taking part in those competition (Spink and Morris 2000). he ight for the television market and the income of the television rights has certainly conditioned the recent evolution of European football. And the response of public authorities and football stakeholders alike to the interest of the audiovisual market in football is also focus of particular attention in the diferent country contributions to this volume. In such a globalised environment, forces inducing transformation of national structures may also come from countries experimenting similar situations. hese dynamics are termed along the volume as emulation or transnational benchmarking and they have a transformative efect that can also be labelled as cross- loading (see above). Briely, these processes can be deined as the comparison of national football structures and results (both economic and sporting results) to the situation of other countries. he comparison can be done with countries that present (1) a sociocultural ainity, (2) geographical proximity, (3) a recent successful period in football competitions or (4) a successful business development of professional football. Certainly, these processes are inluenced by perceptions of what is successful elsewhere as much as by reality. he comparison or benchmarking with foreign football leagues, might result in a degree of transformation of the national system, adopting foreign models that are considered successful. his change can be measured along the parameters deined above. It might be diicult to map a direct cause- and- efect relationship, but the